The Speaker's Ability

So after doing the reading and having that discussion in class, I would just like to maybe work through the idea of the speaker and audience relationship a bit more. So the audience is affected by emotion, but I'm interested in what exactly that means for the speaker. Does that mean that he/she should change his delivery based on what the audience will like to hear? Or could that mean that the speaker should simply be aware of his/her affect on the audience?

In my quest to find answers for these questions, I obviously had to search the texts. So to attest to the idea that perhaps a speaker should be aware of his/her affect on the audience, I found this to be helpful: “[There is persuasion] through the hearers when they’re led to feel emotion [pathos], by the speech; for we do not give the same judgment when grieving and rejoicing or when being friendly and hostile.” (38) So this part of the text reinforced the idea that emotion plays a key role in the art of persuasion. I take this point to mean that there is power in this awareness, and the speaker could use this awareness as an aid to persuasion. For example, when delivering a speech to an audience, he/she may choose to use emotional trigger words, rather than complicated terms. This choice may serve to the speaker's benefit, and the more aware a speaker is of this ability, the easier persuasion may be.

In my search, I was also able to find evidence to answer my other question: Does that mean that he/she should change his delivery based on what the audience will like to hear? After reading this point, I think that the answer is yes- but to a certain extent. "And this should result from the speech, not from a previous opinion that the speaker is a certain kind of person; for it is not the case, as some of the technical writers propose in their treatment of the art, that fair-mindedness on the part of the speaker makes no contribution to persuasiveness; rather, character is almost, so to speak, the controlling factor in persuasion." (38) I take this to mean that the speaker is responsible for his/her presentation of himself, and a speaker must dictate his/her speech accordingly.

I feel like this culmination of ideas, the fact that the speaker must be aware of his ability to inspire emotion and the fact that occasionally a speaker must tailor his delivery to fit the audience, is sort of powerful knowledge. It is easy to persuade someone once you get them on your side. Aristotle seemed to wish to purvey that thought and attach a certain sense of power to the speaker, as well as a sense of responsibility.